Don’t spend too much effort there. They explained in this very thread that they don’t believe anthropogenic climate change is what the actual scientists working on this are telling us it is, with another shitty comparison (because a volcano feels like it’s doing much more than humans).
You cannot reason people out of something they were not reasoned into.
I said its ‘half real’ as in I believe its the only half the cause for climate change.
As for reason lets try a little reason here: Lets say Canada were to drop into the ocean. The entire country ceases to exist. Now that we’ve removed that 1.5% of global emissions, the change in the climate is now what? Almost nothing. Because 98.5% of emissions weren’t even coming from us, and the globe did not even notice when it was 1.5% less. The world still continues to warm, the climate continues to change. CANADA. DOESNT. MATTER. on the global scale.
Even less logical is the people who just want to kill the entire Canadian Oil and Gas industry. So that would reduce global emissions by 0.5% at MOST. Lovely. Now the world still has 99.5% of the same emissions, but we also have thousands and thousands of people out of work. We are now IMPORTING oil and gas because we still need it, even if we didnt use it for gas/diesel which means production increases elsewhere, likely Saudi Arabia where there are less environmental controls. The gov’s now have to raise billions more in taxes because oil revenues are gone, so everyone is now facing major tax hikes on top of crazy high inflation. Seems like a lovely scenario - especially since NO ONE in the world is going to notice or be better off because emissions have only minutely changed. It makes NO sense.
For starters, your belief does not matter. There are lots and lots of scientists that actually work on this, with real world data, and the consensus is that climate change is mostly of human origin (I didn’t say most emissions, but climate change itself; it’s not just about total emissions but about the planet’s capacity to absorb those), and even you could easily see that natural emissions were taken care of by that very same nature, until the industrial revolution, where what we add to the whole cycle started overwhelming nature’s ability to recycle emissions. Your feelings are of no significance.
As for the rest, as other have said, just because you feel (again) that we don’t matter doesn’t mean we don’t. 1.5% is a lot, whether you feel it is or not, especially considering we’re only 0.5% of the population. If you still don’t understand my point, it means we’re a huge source or emissions per capita. We’re actually polluting more than the US per capita.
If the world wants to reduce their emissions, the whole world has to work on it, not just the few biggest culprits. Also that whole diatribe is missing a pretty crucial point: China, the biggest emitter, is also one of the countries moving toward renewables the fastest.
So what? Do we have to wait until we’re left as one of the biggest emitters until we actually do something about it?
There’s also the fact that our oil comes from oil sands, which is harder to extract and produces even more pollution to extract and refine. All oil is not equal. Also moving away from oil and into renewables means we use less of the first, so no need to import as much. And people here are not even arguing for stopping completely our production, just not to build yet another pipeline (which is not just about expanding production, pipelines are not reliable, very often have leaks that pollute even more, and destroy the environment).
Stop using your feelings and hypotheticals, and use actual data.
We’re actually polluting more than the US per capita.
The planet does not care about PER CAPITA emissions which is exactly why this is a GLOBAL problem and not a Canadian problem. If there was ONE person in Canada emitting 1.5% of the world’s emissions, 98.5% of it would still not be coming from Canada so that per capita argument is moot. The climate only care about totals.
until we’re left as one of the biggest emitters
Mathematically impossible. China could score a MASSIVE feat and cut their emissions by 1/3 and they would STILL emit fifteen times more than Canada. We will NEVER be one of the biggest emitters because we are such a tiny emitter to begin with.
Going back to my initial analogy, the climate is not going to notice if we give up our teaspoon and start using a thimble when China is still using a 3.5 gallon pail instead of a 5 gallon pail to sink the boat.
Im not using feelings, Im using reason and math. 1/3 less of China’s 33% emissions is an 11% reduction. 1/3 less of Canada’s 1.5% emissions is 0.5% which is a margin of error in the science that is based on a computer calculated formula with inexact inputs.
“using reason and math” and yet you disagree with the scientific consensus that climate change is man made (“only half” is disagreeing) because of a feeling.
Also what’s the threshold to “be a problem”? 1.5%? Why?
That would leave only 8 (maybe 10, depending on the source) countries that “matter”, with a total of 67-69% of the world’s emissions. So more than 30% of the world’s emissions are not a problem?
The point is focus. It is futile to point the firehose at the weeds on fire in the flower bed when the entire house is going up in flames.
And right now to put out the fire the focus should be on the countries that can actually make a difference, primarily China, the US, India and EU next.
But those also happen to be our biggest trading partners. So in a capitalist country like Canada no one, including the government, wants to damage the bottom line, so instead of having a policy with some teeth like “we will cut our trade with those countries by half until they lower their emissions” what is the message you hear? You hear, “Buy an EV, save the planet” “Get solar panels, save the planet” as if that’s going to actually a dent in emissions in Canada.
It will make an imperceptible dent but the resounding message is please continue to buy buy buy more products and DONT stop spending money on our trading partners. That doesnt make sense and its why I know that our gov’s are not actually serious about climate change.
Don’t spend too much effort there. They explained in this very thread that they don’t believe anthropogenic climate change is what the actual scientists working on this are telling us it is, with another shitty comparison (because a volcano feels like it’s doing much more than humans).
You cannot reason people out of something they were not reasoned into.
I said its ‘half real’ as in I believe its the only half the cause for climate change.
As for reason lets try a little reason here: Lets say Canada were to drop into the ocean. The entire country ceases to exist. Now that we’ve removed that 1.5% of global emissions, the change in the climate is now what? Almost nothing. Because 98.5% of emissions weren’t even coming from us, and the globe did not even notice when it was 1.5% less. The world still continues to warm, the climate continues to change. CANADA. DOESNT. MATTER. on the global scale.
Even less logical is the people who just want to kill the entire Canadian Oil and Gas industry. So that would reduce global emissions by 0.5% at MOST. Lovely. Now the world still has 99.5% of the same emissions, but we also have thousands and thousands of people out of work. We are now IMPORTING oil and gas because we still need it, even if we didnt use it for gas/diesel which means production increases elsewhere, likely Saudi Arabia where there are less environmental controls. The gov’s now have to raise billions more in taxes because oil revenues are gone, so everyone is now facing major tax hikes on top of crazy high inflation. Seems like a lovely scenario - especially since NO ONE in the world is going to notice or be better off because emissions have only minutely changed. It makes NO sense.
Wow, just wow…
For starters, your belief does not matter. There are lots and lots of scientists that actually work on this, with real world data, and the consensus is that climate change is mostly of human origin (I didn’t say most emissions, but climate change itself; it’s not just about total emissions but about the planet’s capacity to absorb those), and even you could easily see that natural emissions were taken care of by that very same nature, until the industrial revolution, where what we add to the whole cycle started overwhelming nature’s ability to recycle emissions. Your feelings are of no significance.
As for the rest, as other have said, just because you feel (again) that we don’t matter doesn’t mean we don’t. 1.5% is a lot, whether you feel it is or not, especially considering we’re only 0.5% of the population. If you still don’t understand my point, it means we’re a huge source or emissions per capita. We’re actually polluting more than the US per capita.
If the world wants to reduce their emissions, the whole world has to work on it, not just the few biggest culprits. Also that whole diatribe is missing a pretty crucial point: China, the biggest emitter, is also one of the countries moving toward renewables the fastest.
So what? Do we have to wait until we’re left as one of the biggest emitters until we actually do something about it?
There’s also the fact that our oil comes from oil sands, which is harder to extract and produces even more pollution to extract and refine. All oil is not equal. Also moving away from oil and into renewables means we use less of the first, so no need to import as much. And people here are not even arguing for stopping completely our production, just not to build yet another pipeline (which is not just about expanding production, pipelines are not reliable, very often have leaks that pollute even more, and destroy the environment).
Stop using your feelings and hypotheticals, and use actual data.
The planet does not care about PER CAPITA emissions which is exactly why this is a GLOBAL problem and not a Canadian problem. If there was ONE person in Canada emitting 1.5% of the world’s emissions, 98.5% of it would still not be coming from Canada so that per capita argument is moot. The climate only care about totals.
Mathematically impossible. China could score a MASSIVE feat and cut their emissions by 1/3 and they would STILL emit fifteen times more than Canada. We will NEVER be one of the biggest emitters because we are such a tiny emitter to begin with.
Going back to my initial analogy, the climate is not going to notice if we give up our teaspoon and start using a thimble when China is still using a 3.5 gallon pail instead of a 5 gallon pail to sink the boat.
Im not using feelings, Im using reason and math. 1/3 less of China’s 33% emissions is an 11% reduction. 1/3 less of Canada’s 1.5% emissions is 0.5% which is a margin of error in the science that is based on a computer calculated formula with inexact inputs.
Sigh
“using reason and math” and yet you disagree with the scientific consensus that climate change is man made (“only half” is disagreeing) because of a feeling.
Also what’s the threshold to “be a problem”? 1.5%? Why?
That would leave only 8 (maybe 10, depending on the source) countries that “matter”, with a total of 67-69% of the world’s emissions. So more than 30% of the world’s emissions are not a problem?
Seriously…
The point is focus. It is futile to point the firehose at the weeds on fire in the flower bed when the entire house is going up in flames.
And right now to put out the fire the focus should be on the countries that can actually make a difference, primarily China, the US, India and EU next.
But those also happen to be our biggest trading partners. So in a capitalist country like Canada no one, including the government, wants to damage the bottom line, so instead of having a policy with some teeth like “we will cut our trade with those countries by half until they lower their emissions” what is the message you hear? You hear, “Buy an EV, save the planet” “Get solar panels, save the planet” as if that’s going to actually a dent in emissions in Canada.
It will make an imperceptible dent but the resounding message is please continue to buy buy buy more products and DONT stop spending money on our trading partners. That doesnt make sense and its why I know that our gov’s are not actually serious about climate change.
Gotcha